The Sabbath commandment in Exodus
20:8-11 in the light of the first creation
account
MB Haynes
25737880
Mini-dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree Magister Theologiae in Old Testament at the
Potchefstroom Campus of the North-West University
Supervisor:
Prof PP Krüger
Co-supervisor:
Dr D Simango
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First, no words can express my thankfulness to the LORD for his lovingkindness. Throughout
many years of study and toil, his care for my family has been unmistakable. I give all praise, glory, and honour to our Lord Jesus Christ, my saviour, redeemer, and friend.
Second, I want to express my thanks to the Bible Institute of South Africa and Mission to the World. My colleagues at Mission to the World have been ever ready with encouragement and prayer. My fellow lecturers at the Bible Institute have graciously made room for me within the faculty to work on this study. Additionally, I want to give my thanks to Prof. P.P. Krüger, whose insights have helped me tremendously.
Third, I give thanks for Mr Bruce Wannemacher. It was his support and encouragement that pushed me to begin this endeavour. I have never worked for such a man before, and for the rest of my days I will seek to emulate the loving concern with which he cares for the people entrusted to him.
Fourth, I am deeply indebted to my father and mother, William and Christine Haynes. I owe them a debt of love that simply cannot be repaid. They have been faithful to the vows they took
at my baptism to raise me in the nurture and admonition of the LORD and to teach me the
doctrines of our holy faith. It has made all the difference.
Fifth, I will be forever thankful to and for my family: Sarah, Elena, Andrew, Ethan, and Russell. They have been more than patient with the long hours that their husband and father needed, above and beyond his normal teaching responsibilities, to complete this study.
Finally, it is with grateful remembrance that I acknowledge my maternal grandfather, the Reverend E. Russell Praetorius:
“One generation shall declare your works to another, and shall declare your mighty acts.
They shall speak of the might of your awesome deeds, and I will declare your greatness.” (Psalm 145:4, 6)
This study is dedicated to his memory in the hope that the LORD would allow me to travel
ABSTRACT
This study is an attempt to define more clearly the Sabbath institution as it is presented in Exodus 20:8-11. It begins by describing the big-picture contours of the Sabbath institution as it has been depicted by various scholars during the last century. Many of these studies focus on delineating what proper Sabbath observance entails or describing how Sabbath rest mirrors God’s rest on the seventh day of creation. However, little investigation has been conducted into the relationship between the fourth commandment in Exodus 20 and the shape of humanity’s task and relationship with God on the seventh day.
The study then examines the nature of God’s rest in the first creation account, describing what “rest” entailed for God, and the work from which he rested. It suggests that this “rest” is from the creational activity of the first six days and that it continues on into the present. It also discusses the relationship between the concept of rest offered by the first creation account and the concept of rest in the understanding of the Ancient Near East and Israel.
Humanity’s role in the created order is also examined. While humans share some qualities with other creatures, such as an embodied existence, they are also distinct from the rest of creation. Only humans are created in the image of God. As such, they are given tasks unique to their status: subduing the earth, exercising dominion over the creatures of the earth, and expanding the borders of the garden as they multiply and fill the earth. These form the heart of their God-given task that they will carry out as God enjoys his seventh-day rest.
Next, the study investigates the particulars of Exodus 20:8-11 and suggests a reading of these particulars against the backdrop of the seventh day as it is described in chapters 3-4. While the rationale for the Sabbath commandment is grounded in the events of the first creation account, the commandment itself also needs to be understood in the context of the Decalogue and, in turn, in the context of the law’s reception at Sinai. The law, and hence the fourth commandment, are central to the calling and purpose of Israel. As Israel fulfils its mandate to be a light to the nations, it will reflect the ideals of the seventh day as they are encapsulated in the law. Far from simply mirroring God’s rest, the fourth commandment reflects the relationship between God and humanity and humanity’s role on the seventh day of creation. The study concludes by drawing together various pieces of the argument and makes suggestions for further research.
OPSOMMING
Die doel van hierdie navorsing is om die instelling van die Sabbat, soos in Eksodus 20:8-11, duidelik te omskryf. Dit begin deur die groot lyne van die Sabbat as insteling na te gaan, soos ander navorsers dit in die vorige eeu beskryf het. ’n Groot deel van genoemde navorsing fokus op dit wat die sabbatsonderhouding behels of hoe die sabbatsrus ’n weerspieëling is van God wat op die sewende skeppingsdag gerus het. Daar is egter min navorsing gedoen oor die verhouding tussen die vierde gebod in Eksodus 20 en dit wat die mens se taak en verhouding met God op die sewende dag behels.
Die navorsing gaan dan verder om die aard van God se rus in die eerste skeppingsberig te beskryf. Dit beskryf wat “rus” vir God sou beteken en die werk waarvan hy sou rus. Dit blyk dat die “rus” ’n “rus” is van sy skeppingsaktiwiteit gedurende die eerste ses dae, wat tot in die hede voortduur. Verder word besin oor die verhouding tussen die rus as begrip in die eerste skeppingsberig en rus soos dit in die Ou Nabye Ooste en Israel verstaan is.
Die rol van die mens in die skeppingsorde word ook nagegegaan. Hoewel die mens sekere kwaliteite soos ʼn liggaam met ander lewende wesens deel, is die mens ook onderskeie van die res van die skepping. Slegs die mens is na God se beeld geskep. Mense kry unieke take wat by hulle status pas: om die aarde te onderwerp, om heerskappy uit te oefen oor al die skepsele van die aarde en om die grense van die tuin uit te brei namate hulle vermeerder en die aarde vul. Hierdie sake vorm die kern van hul Godgegewe taak wat hulle volvoer terwyl God sy rus op die sewende dag geniet.
Vervolgens word Eksodus 20:8-11 in besonderhede bestudeer. Die studie stel voor dat hierdie gedeelte gelees moet word teen die agtergrond van die sewende dag soos beskryf word in hoofstuk 3-4. Hoewel die Sabbatsgebod begrond word in die gebeure van die eerste skeppingsberig, moet die gebod self ook binne die konteks van die Dekaloog verstaan word, wat op sy beurt binne die konteks van die wetgewing by Sinaï beskou moet word. Die Wet, en daarom ook die vierde gebod, staan sentraal in die roeping en bestemming van Israel. Namate Israel sy mandaat vervul om lig vir die nasies te wees, weerspieël hy ook die ideale van die sewende dag soos dit in die Wet vervat word. Die vierde gebod is nie bloot ʼn weerspieëling van God se rus nie, maar beklemtoon eerder die verhouding tussen God en die mens, asook die mens se rol op die sewende skeppingsdag. Die navorsing sluit af deur die argumente op te som en voorstelle vir verdere navorsing te maak.
ABBREVIATIONS OF BIBLE VERSIONS AND OTHER TEXTUAL WORKS
ANE Ancient Near East
ASV American Standard Version (1901)
BDB The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English lexicon
BHRG A biblical Hebrew reference grammar
CDCH The concise dictionary of classical Hebrew
DCH The dictionary of classical Hebrew
ESV English Standard Version
GKC Gesenius’ Hebrew grammar
HALOT The Hebrew and Aramaic lexicon of the Old Testament
HCSB Holman Christian Standard Bible
JM A grammar of biblical Hebrew.
KJV King James Version
LEH A Greek-English lexicon of the Septuagint.
NASB New American Standard Bible
NET New English Translation
NIV New International Version (2011)
RSV Revised Standard Version
WCF/WLC The Westminster confession of faith and catechisms as adopted by the
GENERAL ABBREVIATIONS
bk book
chap(s) chapters(s)
ed editor, edited by, edition
Fragmentary Targum imperfectly preserved Palestinian Targum(s) (Klein, 1980)
lit literally LXX Septuagint MS(S) manuscript(s) MT Masoretic Text pub published rev revised
Sam Pent Samaritan Pentateuch
Sam Samaritan Torah
Syr Syriac Bible
Tg. Onqelos literalistic Targum to the Torah
Tg. Ps-Jonathan midrashic Palestinian Targum to the Torah
trans translation
vol(s) volume(s)
v(v) verse(s)
ABBREVIATIONS OF THE NAMES OF BIBLICAL BOOKS
Old Testament New Testament
Gen Song Matt 1-2 Thess
Ex Is Mark 1-2 Tim
Lev Jer Luke Titus
Num Lam John Philm
Deut Ezek Acts Heb
Josh Dan Rom Jas
Judg Hos 1-2 Cor 1-2 Pet
Ruth Joel Gal 1-2-3 John
1-2 Sam Amos Eph Jude
1-2 Kgs Obad Phil Rev
1-2 Chron Jonah Col
Ezra Mic Neh Nah Est Hab Job Zeph Ps Hag Prov Zech Ecc Mal
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements...i
Abstract...ii
Opsomming...iii
Abbreviations of Bible versions and other textual works...iv
General abbreviations...v
Abbreviations of the names of biblical books...vi
1. Introduction ...1
1.1 Background of Study...1
1.2 Problem Statement...4
1.3 Primary Research Question...5
1.4 Aim and Objectives...5
1.4.1 Aim...5
1.4.2 Objectives...5
1.5 Central Theoretical Argument...5
1.6 Methodology...6
1.7 Arrangement of Chapters...7
2. Intertextuality and the fourth commandment accounts in Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5...8
2.1 Introduction...8
2.2 Intertextuality between Exodus 20:8-11 and the First Creation Account...9
2.3 Intertextuality between Deuteronomy 5:12-15 and the Exodus...11
2.4 Conclusions...13
3. God’s Rest in the First Creation Account...15
3.1 Introduction...15
3.2 God’s Rest in the First Creation Account...15
3.2.1 God’s Work in the First Six Days of Creation (Genesis 1:1-31)...15
3.2.2 God’s Rest on the Seventh Day of Creation...17
3.2.2.1 Genesis 2:1-3...18
3.2.2.2 Transition from activity to rest (2:1)...18
3.2.2.3 Ceasing on the seventh day (2:2)...20
3.2.3 Conclusions Concerning God’s Rest...24
3.3 Divine Rest in the ANE and Israel...25
3.3.1 The First Creation Account and its Placement in the Pentateuch...25
3.3.2 Concepts of Rest in the ANE...27
3.3.3 Concepts of Rest in Israel...28
3.4 Conclusions...33
4. Humanity’s role in the First Creation Account...35
4.1 Introduction...35
4.2 Genesis 1:26-28...35
4.3 Made in the Image of God (1:26a; 1:27a)...37
4.4 Commanded to Reproduce and Fill the Earth (1:28a)...39
4.5 Commanded to Subdue the Earth (1:28a)...39
4.6 Commanded to Exercise Dominion (1:26b; 1:28b)...40
4.7 Conclusions...42
5. The Sabbath Commandment in Exodus 20:8-11...44
5.1 Introduction...44
5.2 The Place of the Decalogue in the Life of Israel...44
5.2.1 Israel at Sinai...44
5.2.2 The Foundational Nature of the Decalogue in the Mission of Israel...46
5.2.3 Motivations for Keeping the Decalogue...49
5.3 Exodus 20:8-11...50
5.3.1 The Sabbath Command (20:8)...51
5.3.2 Stipulations for Proper Observance (20:9-10)...52
5.3.2.1 Work in the fourth commandment...53
5.3.2.2 Labour and the fourth commandment...53
5.3.2.3 The generous application of the fourth commandment...56
5.3.3 Reasoning and Motivation (20:11a)...57
5.3.4 Reasoning and Motivation Concluded (11b)...60
5.4 Conclusions...60
6. Summary and conclusion...63
6.1 Introduction...63
6.2.1 The First Creation Account...64
6.2.2 The Fourth Commandment in Exodus 20:8-11...65
6.3 Overall Message and Theological Trajectory...66
6.4 Concluding Implications for Further Study...68
Reference List...71
Addendum 1...79
LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1: Comparable elements in Genesis 2:1-3 and Exodus 20:11...9
Table 2.2: Relationship between environments and inhabitants in the first creation account. 16 Table 3.1: A comparison of the descriptions of creation and the tabernacle...32
Table 5.1: A comparison of Genesis 2:2-3 and Exodus 20:11...58
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 3.1: Westermann’s conception of Genesis 1-11...26
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of Study
The words of Exodus 20:8-11 would become indelibly etched into the psyche of Israel:
Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORDyour God. On it you shall not do
any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your male servant, or your female servant, or your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates. For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the
seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.1
While the Sabbath may have been known previously (cf. Exodus 16:22-30), at Sinai Yahweh reveals more of its purpose by explicitly grounding its observance in his creational activity. Furthermore, its inclusion in the Decalogue marks it as a concept that was intended to be central to the life of Israel. It was both a sign of the covenant and a measuring rod by which covenant obedience was evaluated (Exodus 31:12-17; 35:2). As such, the penalty for breaking it was severe (Exodus 31:14; 35:2; Numbers 15:32-36). Even if the outward form of the Sabbath seemed to be correct, the spirit of the law could be violated (Isaiah 1:13). Not only did Israel have trouble with proper Sabbath observance before the Exile (Amos 8:4-6), but they continued to have troubles with it afterwards as well (Nehemiah 13:15-18). Still, the promise of blessing was continually held out to the one who properly kept it (Isaiah 56:2, 6; 58:13, 14). Additionally, Sabbath observance is not an issue restricted to the canonical Hebrew Scriptures. It surfaces in later Jewish writings of the Second Temple period, the Mishna and Talmud, and also in the New Testament (e.g., Mark 3:1-6; Luke 13:10-14; John 5:8-18), where we find Jesus teaching about its true purpose (e.g., Matthew 12:1-8).
There continue to be discussions surrounding the Sabbath issue today. Two of the more common ways of approaching the issue are either to examine the idea of “rest” or to examine the continuing applicability of the Sabbath to the New Testament church.
Gerhard von Rad and C. John Collins have sought to address the Sabbath by relating it to the
1. Unless otherwise indicated, Scripture quotations have been taken from the Holy Bible: English Standard
Version.
biblical theme of rest:
• Von Rad (1933:82-88) wrote “There Remains Still a Rest for the People of God”, in which he describes the various ideas of rest found in the Old Testament, their relationship to one another, and their theological trajectories in the New Testament. He argues that the New Testament idea of rest draws upon differing streams of thought found in the Old Testament. One stream follows the idea of rest for Israel in the Promised Land, while the other flows from the idea of
God’s rest among his people. While the latter is an advancement of the first, brought about by
changed circumstances in Israel, in either case the two streams have “absolutely nothing” in common with the rest described in Genesis 2:2-3 (von Rad, 1933:88).
• Collins (2006:88-90), writing more than seventy years after von Rad, comments on the rest theme from a linguistic and literary standpoint. Genesis employs two primary words (specifically תבשׁ and השׂע) that describe Yahweh’s ceasing from work on the seventh day. Exodus 20:8-11 uses the same terminology, but it also uses a different word (חונ) to describe the Genesis 2 context and expand upon the idea. The result is that Exodus provides a more complete and robust depiction of the garden situation. Collins’ (2006:93) conclusion is that God’s creation rest continues, and that it is something into which humanity may enter. The Sabbath commandment is a pointer to this reality. His analysis is helpful from a linguistic standpoint, and connects the concepts of rest, creation, and the Sabbath commandment, but his treatment does not spend time discussing the ways in which humanity’s existence in the garden impacts the picture.
Other scholars approach the Sabbath issue from the standpoint of application. While they do not ignore the Sabbath’s setting in Genesis 2 and Exodus 20, their focus is the place and practice of the Sabbath in modern church life. Jochem Douma (1996:109-160) and Patrick Miller (2009:117-166) are two such scholars. They argue for the continuation of the Sabbath based on the created order and Yahweh’s rest. Their work is helpful in guiding the modern church in practical application, but, like von Rad and Collins, relatively little time is spent developing the theological picture described by Genesis 2 and Exodus 20 or the ways in which this picture should impact the church’s understanding of the Sabbath.
Walter Brueggemann (2014:1, 69) is another scholar who addresses the Sabbath issue from the standpoint of application. He is primarily concerned with the way in which the Sabbath is kept in light of the current state of affairs that the church faces. In his view, the Sabbath is primarily about our resistance to various aspects of the fall: anxiety, coercion, exclusivism, and multitasking. There are components of the Sabbath that relate to both God and humanity. When properly observed, the Sabbath impacts our “neighbourliness” towards both God and humanity as it is articulated in the first and tenth commandments. Like that of Douma and Miller, Brueggemann’s work is helpful in guiding the church towards appropriate practical action; but again, not much time is spent developing the overarching Sabbath picture that serves as motivation for Sabbath observance.
Still others, such as John Walton and Gregory Beale, have examined the rest theme as it relates to the situation in the garden after creation. Unlike von Rad and Collins, their point in doing so is not to comment on the Sabbath but to clarify the way in which Israel would have understood the first chapters of Genesis. In the process of their work they do remark on the Sabbath, but the connections are not explored in detail:
• Walton (2001:148) views the cosmos itself as a temple. He describes it as a “temple complex” and God’s cessation of work on the seventh day as the “purpose of creation and the cosmos”. God ceases from his creative work on the seventh day and is now enthroned as the one who rules over the created order. Israel’s organisational structure of the sanctuary, he says, is a recapitulation of Eden (2001:193). Interestingly, he points out that garden-rest is for God, not for humanity. With regard to the Sabbath, he concludes that humans give recognition to the divine Sabbath in their own Sabbath observance. Walton’s consideration is a step forward in understanding the garden picture that is represented in the Sabbath. However, he does not spend time exploring what God does with his rest; he only hints at it.
• Beale (2004:64-66) takes Walton’s broad ideas concerning the cosmos and focuses them upon Eden and its garden as the archetype to the earthly tabernacle/temple. He traces temple imagery in great detail and relates it to commonly held Ancient Near Eastern beliefs concerning temples. Temples were viewed as resting places where the deity resided once external forces were conquered. He draws parallels with the high priest’s garments, the precious metals used in the tabernacle/temple, and the adornments of Eden. Moreover, he
argues that the ministry of the temple and Adam’s ministry in the garden should be seen as analogous (Beale, 2004:39-70). He sees the mandate that God gives to Israel as an expansion of garden ministry. He does not, however, spend time exploring the specific relationships between this mandate and the Sabbath institution.
Despite the studies that have been undertaken relating to the Sabbath or Genesis 1-2, there has not been much energy spent investigating the relationship between Exodus 20 and the creational situation of Genesis 1-2. With respect to this, there are a number of issues that need to be understood clearly: Was the Sabbath simply a reflection of God’s rest on the seventh day? Is humanity’s activity in the garden reflected in the Sabbath institution? If so, how is it reflected? What did God spend his rest time doing? At a motivational level, should garden imagery have impacted Israel’s Sabbath observance? Additionally, while scholarship has not neglected the Old Testament setting in which the Sabbath was born, it seems that many begin with contemporary questions and work back to the Sabbath rather than beginning with its Old Testament foundations. It is a subtle hermeneutical move that has major implications for how the Old Testament is understood. Approached this way, the Sabbath (and, indeed, the entirety of the Old Testament) is reduced to having value only as it relates to contemporary orthopraxy. This violates the Sabbath’s inherent worth as an Old Testament institution in and of itself. Only when the Sabbath is appreciated on its own terms, as an institution given to Israel, are we on solid ground in making hermeneutical moves to contemporary questions of application. In other words, our hermeneutical method must begin with the Old Testament and move to the New Testament — not vice versa. It is hoped that this study will help to clarify the Old Testament theological foundations and trajectories that inform New Testament considerations.
1.2 Problem Statement
As we have seen in the brief background given above, numerous books and articles have been written about the Sabbath institution. Most of these focus on (a) delineating what proper Sabbath observance entails or (b) describing how Sabbath rest mirrors God’s rest on the seventh day of the creation week. However, little investigation has been made into the relationship between Exodus 20:8-11 and the various aspects of humanity’s role during God’s seventh-day rest. The purpose of this study is to provide some first steps towards understanding the relationship between Exodus 20:8-11 and God’s intent for humanity on the seventh day.
1.3 Primary Research Question
Therefore, the primary research question is: How does the Sabbath institution described in Exodus 20:8-11 relate to God’s rest, his interaction with humanity, and the created order after it was completed? A number of other questions arise in answering the primary research question: 1. How does the first creation account relate to the two occurrences of the fourth
commandment?
2. What was the nature of God’s rest on the seventh day as it is portrayed in the first creation account?
3. What was the nature of humanity’s relationship with God during this rest period?
4. How does Exodus 20:8-11 reflect the overarching situation at the conclusion of the creation week?
1.4 Aim and Objectives
1.4.1 Aim
The aim of this study is to determine if there is more to the Sabbath commandment as expressed in Exodus 20 than simply ceasing from normal work activity as a reflection of God’s rest on the seventh day of creation.
1.4.2 Objectives
The objectives of this study are:
1. To examine the intertextual relationships between the creation accounts and the Decalogue accounts.
2. To examine the nature of God’s rest on the seventh day.
3. To describe humanity’s intended role in creation as it relates to God’s Sabbath rest.
4. To determine the extent to which humanity’s role in creation is reflected in the Sabbath commandment of Exodus 20:8-11.
1.5 Central Theoretical Argument
The central theoretical argument of this study is that the Sabbath institution does not simply recapitulate God’s cessation from work on the Sabbath; it also recalls humanity’s function and relationship to God in the garden. While the weekly Sabbath entails a pattern of rest that mirrors
God’s creational work, it also points to a time when humanity enjoyed an intimate relationship with their creator and ministered before him.
1.6 Methodology
While there continues to be debate surrounding the process by which the texts under consideration achieved their current state (McKenzie & Kaltner, 2007:46-50, 60-63, 114-118), this study works with the text as it is found in its final form. The biblical passages under discussion will be analysed using the exegetical method of Douglas Stuart (2001:5-32). Particular focus will be given to key words and the contexts in which they occur. Next, inter-textual relationships will be considered. In this study, an “inter-inter-textual relationship” refers to the relations between one specific text and other texts found within the canon of Scripture. In other words, the theological themes that the key words describe will be traced through other passages in the Old Testament in an effort to determine their overarching theological trajectory (Vanhoozer, 2000:826-871). The views of various contemporary scholars such as Westermann, Collins, Walton, and Beale will be considered throughout the process.
After an introductory overview of the study as a whole, including a concise overview of current scholarship, chapters 3 and 4 will examine the biblical texts. The themes of God’s Sabbath rest and humanity’s role in creation will be examined in the context of the first creation account and the intertextuality of their component themes analysed as they develop in Exodus 20. This approach will allow the benefits of both theology and exegesis to be brought to bear on the Sabbath commandment and will grant a better understanding of the institution as a whole.
Chapter 2 will discuss the intertextual relationships between Genesis 1-2, Exodus 20, and Deuteronomy 5 to establish a rationale for limiting the study to the first creation account and Exodus 20. It will also discuss various approaches to the text as a whole.
Chapter 3 will examine aspects of God’s rest suggested by the first creation account.
Chapter 4 will examine humanity’s creational role as it is described in the first creation account. Chapter 5 will focus on exegeting Exodus 20:8-11 in its context.
The concluding chapter will tie together the various components of the study, shedding light on the theological trajectory that proper Sabbath observance was meant to give Israel, and providing for a more robust understanding of the purposes and motivations for keeping the Sabbath.
1.7 Arrangement of Chapters
1. Introduction and overview
2. Intertextuality and the fourth commandment accounts in Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5 3. God’s rest in the first creation account
4. Humanity’s role in the first creation account 5. The Sabbath commandment in Exodus 20:8-11 6. Summary and conclusion
CHAPTER 2
INTERTEXTUALITY AND THE FOURTH COMMANDMENT ACCOUNTS IN EXODUS 20 AND DEUTERONOMY 5
2.1 Introduction
The purpose of this chapter is to provide a rationale for excluding the fourth commandment in Deuteronomy 5 and for delimiting the study to the first creation account (Genesis 1:1-2:3) and the fourth commandment in Exodus 20. This will be done in two ways. First, the intertextual links between Exodus 20:8-11 and the first creation account will be surveyed. Second, the intertextual ties between Deuteronomy 5:12-15 and the exodus event will be surveyed. Finally, several conclusions will be drawn regarding the two accounts of the fourth commandment and the rationales upon which they are grounded.
Waltke (2007:125) defines intertextuality as “the phenomenon whereby one passage of Scripture refers to another”. Stuart suggests investigating this phenomena by asking the following questions of a text: “Is the passage or any part of it quoted or alluded to anywhere else in the Bible? . . . If it is quoted, how does the circumstance under which it is quoted aid in its interpretation?” These questions are necessary because the choice of quotation or allusion acts as a pointer to the fundamental nature of the theology that it presents (Stuart, 2001:23). In the present situation we will turn those questions around: Does our passage or any part of it quote or allude to another passage in the Bible? If it does, how does the original circumstance of the quotation or allusion aid in the interpretation of the present passage? With respect to the subject under discussion, the fourth commandment is recorded in two different texts: Exodus 20:8-11 and Deuteronomy 5:12-15. If it can be shown that the two versions of the fourth commandment contain intertextual references to different texts then we must go on to answer Stuart’s second question, because the rationales for the commandments may differ. Our primary concern in this study is to suggest a comprehensive description of the fourth commandment as it is portrayed in Exodus 20:8-11. If the rationale given by Deuteronomy 5 differs from the rationale suggested by Exodus 20, it may add little to our understanding of the commandment as it is portrayed in
Exodus 20. Indeed, this is exactly what we find. The fourth commandment in Exodus 20 makes
an appeal to God’s rest in the first creation account as its rationale, whereas the commandment in Deuteronomy 5 appeals to Yahweh’s redemptive actions on Israel’s behalf.
2.2 Intertextuality between Exodus 20:8-11 and the First Creation Account
Scholars have long recognized the ties between the first creation account and the fourth commandment (Keil, 1866:399; Berry, 1931:209; Westermann, 1974:173; Childs, 1974:416; Enns, 2000:419; Stuart, 2006:459; Miller, 2009:124; et al.). While Exodus does not quote the first creation account exactly, the allusion is strong. Parallels are made in three areas: (a) the time period of creation and resting, (b) the created order, and (c) the sanctification of the seventh day, along with a rationale for sanctification.
Genesis 2:1-3 Exodus 20:11
And on the seventh day God finished his work that he had done, and he rested on the seventh day from all his work that he had done. (Genesis 2:2)
For in six days the LORD made . . . and rested on the seventh day. (Exodus 20:11a, c)
Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. (Genesis 2:1)
. . . the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them . . . (Exodus 20:11b)
So God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it God rested from all his work that he had done in creation. (Genesis 2:3)
. . . and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy. (Exodus 20:11d)
Table 2.1: Comparable elements in Genesis 2:1-3 and Exodus 20:11.
Beyond the three listed above, there are other relationships that can be made between Exodus 20 and the first creation account (e.g., the use of the terms תבשׁ and חונ). Specific exegetical parallels will be taken up in chapter 4, where Exodus 20:8-11 is discussed in further detail. For the time being we will add two broad areas of correspondence:
• Genesis 2:2, 3 use השׂע (“do” or “make”) to describe God’s creative activity. The same verb is used to describe his work in Exodus 20:11. Furthermore, השׂע is used in the description of the fourth commandment’s prohibition in verse 10. In both cases השׂע is associated with ה ָכא ַָל ְמ (“work”); in Genesis it refers to God’s work, while in Exodus it is Israel’s (Miller, 2009:124-125).
• Both accounts connect the cessation of work with blessing and sanctification. In Genesis 2:3, the seventh day is “made holy” and “blessed” because God rested on that day. In Exodus 20:11, the Sabbath day is “blessed” and “sanctified” because Yahweh rested on that day.
While there are areas of broad correspondence, there are also several distinctions between the first creation account and Exodus 20. First, the first creation account references God (םי ִהלֹ ֱא)
throughout; Exodus 20 specifies that the seventh day is a Sabbath “to the LORD your God”
(ךָי ֶהלֹ ֱא ה ָוהי ַל; Exodus 20:10) and that it was the LORD(הוהי; Exodus 20:11) who performed the
work of creation. Second, Genesis 2:1-3 refers to the last day of creation as “the seventh day”, while Exodus 20:11 designates it as the “Sabbath” day. Third, Exodus 20 substitutes חונ for תבשׁ, which is found in the first creation account (see 5.3.3 below for an extended discussion on this point).
Finally, when Exodus 20 alludes to the first creation account it seeks to apply the commandment to the experience of all humanity; its extension to male and female servants and even as far as “the sojourner who is within your gates” (Exodus 20:9) describes something beyond simple cultic observance. Sabbath rest is not something just for Israel: it is intended for everyone (Miller, 2009:124). As we will see below (section 2.3), while the Sabbath commandment in Deuteronomy 5 is also universal in scope, it grounds its observance in the experience of Israel rather than in the shared experience of humanity.
A final word should be said about the various approaches that have been taken in the study of the Sabbath commandment in Exodus 20. As exemplified by Westermann (1974:88-90) and Childs (1974:416), critical scholarship has located the origin of the Sabbath command in the work of the Priestly writer. Not only did he insert the rationale for the command into Exodus 20, but he also amended the first creation account to reflect the fourth commandment, resulting in the strong allusion to the first creation account in Exodus 20. The fourth commandment was not the invention of the Priestly writer. He was dependent upon a prior Sabbath tradition that was in existence before both the first creation account and the Exodus commandment were compiled. The genius of the Priestly writer was in working out a theology in which the Sabbath commandment and the created order were bound together.
Other scholars take a different approach. Collins (2006:228-231) suggests that source-critical fragmentation runs counter to the wholeness that a literary reading of Genesis 1-2 invites. He suggests that, while there may be sources, they are now unrecoverable. This, however, does not hide the intention of the text. From a literary standpoint, the two creation accounts are complementary. The first is a “big-picture creation account,” and this is followed by an accounting of the first human family and the way that they were created. He goes so far as to suggest that they should not even be referred to as two creation accounts (Collins, 2006:229).
A full discussion of source and unity issues is beyond the scope of this study. What is germane, however, is that, whether one assumes a critical approach to the text or postulates a basic unity, the Exodus account grounds its theology in the first creation account and uses a “carefully constructed unit” to present its argument (Childs, 1974:415).
2.3 Intertextuality between Deuteronomy 5:12-15 and the Exodus
While the fourth commandment of Exodus 20 grounds itself in creation, the second iteration of the fourth commandment, in Deuteronomy, appeals to Israel’s redemption from Egypt as its point of departure (Craigie, 1976:157; Merrill, 1994:151; Wright, 1996:75; Waltke, 2007:422; Miller, 2009:130; Block, 2012:164):
Observe the Sabbath day, to keep it holy, as the LORDyour God commanded you. Six
days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORDyour God. On it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter or
your male servant or your female servant, or your ox or your donkey or any of your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates, that your male servant and your female servant may rest as well as you. You shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the LORDyour God brought you out from there with a mighty
hand and an outstretched arm. Therefore the LORDyour God commanded you to keep
the Sabbath day (Deuteronomy 5:12-15).
There are some scholars who see the primary thrust of this commandment as humanitarian (e.g., Eder, 1997:191; Block, 2012:163). The temptation, they argue, would have been for a head of household to observe the Sabbath with his family but to exclude the rest of the household from the benefit that the Sabbath afforded. Thus the Sabbath commandment specifically enumerates those who would not normally be considered for such a benefit. While Israel’s redemption is seen as a motivator for Sabbath observance, it is ancillary to the primary concern of the commandment, which is to (a) give relief to and (b) identify with those who are marginalised and economically vulnerable (Block, 2012:164). Eder (1997:191) forcefully concludes his discussion on the issue with:
Let us remember that both versions of this Commandment entail a tremendous social revolution. Put into practice, it obliterates the right of slaveholders to push slaves, laborers, and even cattle, to incessant work-like machines; it gives human status to the underprivileged; and, at least on the seventh day, by proclaiming a day of rest for
all, social differences are equalized. It began a process still far from completion of bringing equality before the Creator to all men for all times.
Others (Craigie, 1976:157; Merrill, 1994:153; Wright, 1996:75) argue that the primary rationale for the commandment is Israel’s redemption from Egypt. They would not deny that a humanitarian aspect is present in the commandment as it is presented in Deuteronomy 5, but argue that the humanitarian implications are an outworking of Israel’s command to remember their redemption. The purpose of the Sabbath was to cease working and spend time serving the God who saved them from a life of slavery. It was only because Israel remembered what it was like to be oppressed in a foreign land, where they were worked continuously, that they would not oppress others in a similar fashion (Wright, 1996:76). Craigie (1976:157) takes this line of thinking further and suggests that if Israel remembered their redemption from Egypt it would not be wholly unlike the command in Exodus 20 because, in essence, Israel’s redemption from Egypt constituted its creation as a free nation (cf. Exodus 15:16b). In both instances something new was brought into existence.
Waltke (2007:422) bypasses the humanitarian aspect of the commandment entirely in his rationale, arguing that the redemptive-historical outlook of the fourth commandment in Deuteronomy is primarily theological in purpose. In observing the Sabbath, an Israelite weekly proclaims that he is a free person by the direct action of Yahweh on his behalf. It was a “lived-out” sign.
Like Waltke, Childs also stresses the theological point being made by the Deuteronomy 5 rendering of the fourth commandment. Although the commandment speaks about the exodus event, that memory is not tied to the humanitarian concern also suggested by the commandment. The purpose of tying the commandment to the exodus event is to arouse in Israel the memory of her deliverance from slavery. Far from being a humanitarian command, its purpose is theological. A primary concern of Deuteronomy is that all of Israel have the opportunity to participate in the Sabbath. This requires that even slaves and animals be invited to join in the observance. While proper Sabbath observance includes slaves and animals, it is not about slaves and animals (Childs, 1974:416-417).
2.4 Conclusions
The factors surveyed above suggest that there are strong ties between the first creation account and the fourth commandment as it is described in Exodus 20. There are intertextual ties between (a) the time period of creation and resting, (b) the created order, and (c) the sanctification of the seventh day, along with its rationale for sanctification. Nowhere, however, is the idea of redemption specifically referenced in the Exodus 20 rendering of the fourth commandment. Deuteronomy 5, however, is specifically set in the context of Israel’s redemption. The primary intertextual allusion is to the exodus event, when Israel was brought out from Egypt “with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm” (Deuteronomy 5:15; cf. Exodus 6:1-9). At no point in the fourth commandment of Deuteronomy 5 is the first creation account specifically referenced. Thus the rationale for the fourth commandment is different in each book.
This is not to imply that the Exodus 20 version of fourth commandment and the Deuteronomy 5 rendering are necessarily incompatible. Merrill (1994:152) suggests a possible resolution to the differing rationales by pointing to the assumed audience for each rendition of the command: The implied audience for the Exodus account are people who had personally experienced the exodus event. God had proven himself as the one and only ruler of the cosmos, against whom no other god could stand. Therefore, the Sabbath commandment in Exodus points back to creation and the one who created all things. The implied audience for the Deuteronomy account is the following generation, forty years later. As they face the challenges of entering and conquering the Promised Land they need to recollect that Yahweh had already acted on their behalf when he redeemed them from the bondage of Egypt. And so “Sabbath now speaks of redemption and not creation, of rest and not cessation” (Merrill, 1994:152). He also sees the fourth commandment in Deuteronomy as an expansion of the original giving of the law in Exodus 20, where the twin
references to the command of the LORD in Deuteronomy 5:12 and 15 look back to the original
Exodus command (Merrill, 1994:150). Other suggestions could be made as well. The concluding chapter of this study will suggest further areas of investigation that may bear fruit in reconciling the purposes to which each version points (section 6.4).
The purpose of this chapter has been to describe a rationale for delimiting this study to Exodus 20 and the first creation account. As we have seen, while the primary command in each version of the commandment is the same (to cease working on the seventh day), the underlying
principles move in different directions. With this in mind we can answer our adaptations to Stuart’s two questions. Both passages allude to other portions of the Pentateuch, and both passages are profoundly affected by the context of those allusions. The fourth commandment in Exodus is grounded in the created order. The fourth commandment in Deuteronomy is grounded in Israel’s redemption from Egypt. The purpose of this study is to suggest a more comprehensive description of the fourth commandment as it is presented in Exodus 20; because the underlying theology of the fourth commandment in Deuteronomy 5 is grounded in a different principle, we will limit the study to the fourth commandment of Exodus 20 and its underlying allusion to the first creation account.
CHAPTER 3
GOD’S REST IN THE FIRST CREATION ACCOUNT 3.1 Introduction
There are two goals in this chapter. The initial goal is to analyse the first creation account with a view to understanding the rest that God enjoyed at the end of his creative workweek. This will include two things: (a) a brief overview of his work during the first six days and (b) an examination of the descriptors which mark the rest of the seventh day in Genesis 2:1-3. The second goal is to survey the ideas of rest in other cultures of the Ancient Near East (ANE) and their relationship to Israel’s own conception of rest. The results of these two lines of investigation will then allow us to draw a number of conclusions regarding the picture that the first creation account presents concerning the state of affairs that existed on the seventh day.
3.2 God’s Rest in the First Creation Account
Analysing God’s rest on the seventh day necessitates an understanding of the work from which he rested. Therefore, this discussion is divided into two segments. The first segment is a brief overview of God’s work during the first six days of creation. It is not intended to be an exhaustive study. Rather, the purpose is to orient ourselves to God’s overall activity during the first six days and to prepare us for the rest that marks the seventh day. The second segment will focus on God’s seventh-day rest. Since God’s rest is the object of our study in this section, most of the discussion will be centred there. Finally, some conclusions will be drawn about the relationship between God’s work on the first six days, his rest on the seventh day, and the nature of that rest.
3.2.1 God’s Work in the First Six Days of Creation (Genesis 1:1-31)
The first two verses of Genesis 1 serve as a background statement that sets the stage for the events that begin on the first day of the creation week (Collins, 2006:54-55; Waltke, 2007:179). As God begins his work, the created order (see the explanation of םִי ַמ ָשּׁ ַה and ץ ֶר ָא ָה below) is
unorganised and unproductive2. The rest of Genesis 1 describes the transformation of this
unorganised and unproductive space into organised, inhabited, and productive space.
2. See HALOT, 2000:1689; s.v. וּהֹת
• The first three days describe the organisation and function of various aspects of creation. The first day sees the creation of light, and its separation from darkness. The reader is also informed that newly created light is organised into a period of time that is called “day”. It is juxtaposed with the darkness that is a period of time called “night” (vv. 3-5). Together they function as the measure of time by which humans will order their existence.
• As with the first day, the second day records a division (vv. 6-8). The “waters” of verse two are now divided between those that are above and those that are below. In between is a physical expanse3that begins to define the territory in which humanity will carry out its existence. God
then calls this physical expanse “sky” or “heaven” (םִי ָמ ָשׁ). In the Hebrew mindset, this functioned something like a roof that God opened from time to time for the purpose of
governing meteorological phenomena4 (Walton, 2001:112).
• The third day describes the separation of dry land from the waters that are under the expanse (vv. 9-10). It also describes the vegetation that begins to cover the dry land (vv. 11-13). Their completion finalises the landscape that will support the existence of humanity (Waltke, 2001:62; Walton, 2009:57-58).
The second three days describe the entities that fill the environment created in the first three days. The environs created in days one through three respectively correlate with the creatures that are created for them on days four through six:
Environment Inhabitant/Function
Day 1: light and dark Day 4: lights of day and night
Day 2: sea and sky (i.e., the “firmament”) Day 5: sea creatures and flying creatures Day 3: dry land and vegetation Day 4: land animals and humanity
Table 2.2: Relationship between environments and inhabitants in the first creation account.
• Day four (vv. 14-19) sees the sun, moon, and stars set into the “expanse” of the heavens (v. 15). It also describes the function for which they were created: “. . . to separate the day from
3. Heb. ַעי ִק ָר: the “firm vault of heaven” (HALOT, 2000:1290)
4. cf. Genesis 7:11; 8:2; 19:24; Joshua 10:11; 2 Kings 1:10; Psalm 148:4; Jeremiah 14:22
the night. And let them be for signs and for seasons, and for days and years . . .” (v. 14). Not only do these entities regulate time, but they also “rule” the day and night (vv. 16, 18).5
• Day five (vv. 20-23) introduces a new phase into God’s created order: he creates creatures that are animated and embodied. The phrase ה ָיּ ַח שׁ ֶפ ֶנ is a descriptor that will be shared by the creatures of the sixth day, and sets them apart from what has been made during the first four days. Juxtaposed against the second day, when the expanse was created to separate the waters from the waters, flying creatures fly in the expanse (םִי ָמ ָשּׁ ַה ַעי ִק ְר יֵנ ְפּ־ל ַע, lit. “upon the face of the expanse of the heavens”), while swarming creatures swarm in the waters. The fifth day also marks the first instance where newly formed creatures are given the imperative to “be fruitful and multiply” (וּב ְרוּ וּר ְפּ). Thus the pattern established in the first four days is continued on day five: creatures are created; the reader is told what they do and where they do it (fly in the air; swarm in the waters); and he is also told that their function has to do with multiplication and fruitfulness.6
• The depiction of the sixth day is the longest in the creation narrative (vv. 24-31). Dry land was formed in day three, and now in day six creatures are created to inhabit it. These creatures are divided into two categories: land creatures and humanity. The land creatures are described in much the same way as the creatures of day five that fly or swarm. They are described as ה ָיּ ַח שׁ ֶפ ֶנ (v. 24), and their function is also specified as reproducing “according to their kind” (vv. 24-25). The last thing to be created is humanity. In addition to being animated and embodied creatures like those of day five and earlier in day six, humans are given the imperative of multiplication (see section 4.4 below). However, unlike the other creatures, humanity also has functions that relate to God and the rest of creation (Walton, 2009:67-68). Humanity’s function will be discussed more fully in section 4.3 below.
3.2.2 God’s Rest on the Seventh Day of Creation
Having surveyed the work accomplished by God on the first six days of creation, we are now in a position to examine more closely his rest on day seven. We will do this by investigating the
5. For a discussion on the existence of day and night before the creation of the sun, see Wenham (1987:22) or, for an alternative view, Collins (2006:56-58).
6. See Walton (2009:65), who argues for a similar point of view.
account of the seventh day found in Genesis 2:1-3 and analysing God’s cessation from activity, his blessing of the day, and his setting the day apart.
3.2.2.1 Genesis 2:1-37
1
׃ם ָא ָב ְצ־ל ָכ ְו ץ ֶר ָא ָה ְו םִי ַמ ָשּׁ ַה וּלּ ֻכְי ַו
1So the heavens and the earth and all their multitude were finished.2
ר ֶשׁ ֲא ֺותּ ְכא ַל ְמ י ִעי ִב ְשּׁ ַה םוֹיּ ַבּ םי ִהלֹ ֱא ל ַכ ְי ַו
וֹתּ ְכא ַל ְמ־ל ָכּ ִמ י ִעי ִב ְשּׁ ַה םֺויּ ַבּ תֹבּ ְשׁ ִיּ ַו ה ָשׂ ָע
׃ה ָשׂ ַע ר ֶשׁ ֲא
2Thus God finished on the seventh day with his work which he did and he ceased on the seventh day from all his work which he did;
3
י ִכּ וֹתֹא שׁ ֵדּ ַק ְי ַו י ִעי ִב ְשּׁ ַה םֺוי־ת ֶא םי ִהלֹא ךְ ֶר ָבְי ַו
םי ִהלֹ ֱא אר ָבּ־ר ֶשׁ ֲא וֹתּ ְכא ַל ְמ־ל ָכּ ִמ ת ַב ָשׁ וֹב
פ ׃תוֹשׂ ֲע ַל
3and God blessed the seventh day and he set it apart, because on it he ceased from all his work that he created by doing.
As a whole, Genesis 2:1-3 serves as a conclusion to the first creation account. While all three verses are semantically similar, Genesis 2:1 acts as a summary statement to the creative activity that God accomplishes in Genesis 1:1-31, whereas 2:2-3 describe the rest that is the result of that completed activity (See Westermann, 1974:168-169; Waltke, 2007:186).
3.2.2.2 Transition from activity to rest (2:1)
Verse 1a. וּלּ ֻכְי ַו “So they were finished”
Genesis 2:1 records a transition point in the first creation narrative. While creative activity fills the first six days, the seventh day is marked by an absence of creative activity. This transition is made distinct in the Hebrew text of 2:1 by the wayyiqtol, which marks it as the introduction to a
concluding statement.8 Used 206 times in the Hebrew Bible, הלכ means intransitively (in the
Qal) “be complete, be finished, be destroyed, be consumed, be weak, be determined” (DCH,
1998, 4:416). Similarly, in the Piel, it carries the transitive nuance of “complete” or “end”. The
Pual form used here has a similar, passive, sense: “be finished”, “be ended”, or “be completed”
(BDB, 1951:477; HALOT, 2000:477). The LXX renders it as συνετελέσθησαν, which also means “to finish off” or “to be accomplished” (LEH, 2001:par. 26876; s.v. συντελέω). The idea
7. Author’s translation.
8. See BHRG (1997:167), JM (2008:363), and Wenham (1987:5), who all cite this verse as a summative or conclusive example of the wayyiqtol.
of “completing” or “finishing” can be understood in one of two senses: First, various pieces are continually added together until fullness is achieved and an activity is stopped. For example, one can pour water into a glass until it is full. When the glass is full (i.e., fullness is achieved) one ceases to pour because the intent to fill the glass with water has been completed. The second sense involves the removal of parts from a whole until nothing remains. To return to our example of the glass of water: A glass of water can be emptied by drinking from it. One ceases drinking from the glass when there is nothing left in it. In either sense, emphasis is placed on completion of intent as the cause of cessation. With this in mind, הלכ should not be restricted to the simple cessation of activity, but should imply the completion of intent as well (Oswalt, 1980:439). Genesis 2:1 reflects the first sense of הלכ: the realm of embodied existence has been completed and everything placed in that realm has filled it up — not in the sense of an exhaustion of space, but rather that everything God intended to create has been created. He has fulfilled his creational intent and therefore stops creating new things. Coupled with the use of the wayyiqtol form (mentioned above), הלכ indicates that this verse (a) draws to a conclusion the creative acts of God described so far and (b) serves as a transition to verses 2-3, which more fully describe the resultant state of affairs at the close of the first creation account.
Verse 1b. ם ָא ָב ְצ־ל ָכ ְו ץ ֶר ָא ָה ְו םִי ַמ ָשּׁ ַה “The heavens and the earth and all their multitude”
The subject of the verb (הלכ) tells us what has been completed: “The heavens and the earth and all their multitude”. But what exactly is that? The waw serves to join םִי ַמ ָשּׁ ַה and ץ ֶר ָא ָה in a nominal hendiadys. Together they describe the overall environment in which the other creatures carry out their existence. The same construction of ץ ֶר ָא ָה ְו םִי ַמ ָשּׁ ַה is used Genesis 1:1; thus its use here echoes the same concept and serves as an inclusio. ץ ֶר ָא ָה ְו םִי ַמ ָשּׁ ַה does not simply refer to the sky (created on the second day) and the earth (created on the third day), because the point is not to describe specific aspects of the environment; it is a shorthand statement representing the cosmic environment (Waltke, 2007:186).
In addition to the cosmic environment, the things that fill the environment have been completed (Collins, 2006:49n41). Syntactically, the use of the third masculine plural suffix (“their”) in ם ָא ָב ְצ refers to ץ ֶר ָא ָה ְו ם ִי ַמ ָשּׁ ַה as its antecedent. Here, א ַָב ָצ describes the “host” of creation (BDB, 1951:838), or the “multitude” that filled the created order (CDCH, 2009:373). In other words, it is used as a descriptor for all of the created things residing in ץ ֶר ָא ָה ְו םִי ַמ ָשּׁ ַה (Keil, 1866:42). The
noun phrase in which it is found (ם ָא ָב ְצ־ל ָכ ְו) begins with a waw that serves to coordinate the two differing aspects of creation: the environment of the created order and the material substance which inhabits that environment. We can now return to our question: What exactly has been completed? The entire actualized order — both the environment and the things that fill it. Thus in one short verse the creative activity of Genesis 1 is concluded and the foundation laid for the uniqueness of the seventh day.
3.2.2.3 Ceasing on the seventh day (2:2)
A textual variant of this verse reads י ִשּׁ ִשּׁ ַה םוֹיּ ַבּ םי ִהלֹ ֱא ל ַכְי ַו (“and God finished on the sixth day”) rather than י ִעי ִב ְשּׁ ַה םוֹיּ ַבּ םי ִהלֹ ֱא ל ַכְי ַו (“and God finished on the seventh day”). The alternate reading is supported by Sam Pent, LXX, and Syr. The most plausible reason for this emendation is a desire to present God as engaged in nothing but rest on the seventh day (Wenham, 1987:5). The implication is that if God does anything on the seventh day then it is not properly a day of rest. The emendation, however, is not necessary; there are other plausible ways to understand the text. First, it is possible to translate with a pluperfect: “And God had finished on the seventh day . . .” The same verb is also used in Genesis 17:22, 49:33 and Exodus 40:33 to describe action that is completed; a similar situation can be understood here (Wenham, 1987:35; Hamilton, 1990:142). Second, the verbs in 2:1-3 are not describing the same kind of creative activity that marks days one through six (i.e., “making” and “creating”). They are verbs of mental activity: “were finished” (2:1), “finished”, “rested” (2:2), “blessed”, and “made holy” (3:3). Far from being actions of work, they are activities of “enjoyment, approval, and delight” (Collins, 2006:71). Finally, the statement can be understood as a declarative. God has already declared various aspects of his work to be “good” and “very good”. Now, as he inspects the completed product of his handiwork, he decides that it is complete (Speiser, 1981:7-8).
Generally, English translations render תבשׁ as “rest”.9 This, however, is not the only possible
meaning of the word. Hamilton (1980b:902) describes its “basic thrust” as “to sever, put an end to” when it is transitive and “to desist, come to an end” when it is intransitive. He translates it as “rest” only when it is used in the Qal theme in a “Sabbath context” (13 of 27 occurrences). A number of scholars concur with this assessment (BDB, 1951:991; Stolz, 1997:1298; HALOT,
9. E.g., ESV, NIV (1984), NIV (2011), RSV, KJV, ASV, HCSB, and NASB, to name just a few.
2000:1407; CDCH, 2009:448). This may be true, but that leaves us with the question, “If the meaning of תבשׁ in this context is ‘to cease’ or ‘to end’, then what kind of ‘rest’ is intended here?” In other words, how does the “rest” described in a “Sabbath context” relate to the “basic thrust” of the verb? An analysis of the biblical usage of the word is helpful. If there are examples of תבשׁ meaning something other than to “cease” or “come to an end” then the nuance of “rest” described in Sabbath contexts will lack clarity. However, if all of the biblical uses outside of “Sabbath” contexts have the idea of cessation as a common denominator then it will add clarity to its use in a Sabbath context. And, indeed, the idea of cessation is exactly what we find.10
Some occurrences use תבשׁ with the clear idea of cessation. Joshua 5:12 is typical of these. When the Israelites enter the Promised Land we read, “And the manna ceased the day after they ate the produce of the land.” Similarly, a number of other passages use the word in the Hiphil stem with God as the subject. In Ezekiel 12:23 Yahweh is pictured as taking action against a proverb that had become popular amongst the exiles: “Tell them therefore, ‘Thus says the Lord GOD: I will put an end to the proverb, and they shall no more use it as a proverb in Israel.’”
These passages clearly refer to the idea of cessation. Other passages do not overtly refer to the cessation theme yet the idea nonetheless underlies the thought. When Josiah reforms temple worship after finding the Book of the Covenant we find that, “. . . he deposed the priests whom the kings of Judah had ordained to make offerings in the high places at the cities of Judah . . .” (2 Kings 23:5). The underlying idea is that the priests who were leading the people astray were forced to cease their ministry.
When the biblical usage of תבשׁ is taken into account in its entirety a number of things become clear. First, the primary idea behind תבשׁ, as noted by many commentators, is to “cease” or “put an end to” (See Keil, 1866:42; Westermann, 1974:173; Walton, 2001:146; Collins, 2006:89). Second, the idea of “rest” should not be divorced from the idea of “ceasing”. Rest begins because an activity has been stopped. Furthermore, the rest obtained is not a general rest as it might be commonly understood in twenty-first-century popular culture. It is not the absence of all activity for the purpose of leisure. It is rest from a particular activity previously underway. Finally, the use of תבשׁ indicates that God did not rest because he was weary. The implication is
10.A table listing all Old Testament occurrences of תבשׁ may be found in Addendum 1.
that he finished everything that he intended to create and was satisfied with the results.11 There
was, therefore, no need to continue with that activity. The issue is one of completion, not weariness. Moreover, God did not cease all activity on the seventh day. His rule over creation and his involvement in the events of creation continue unabated (Collins, 2006:92; cf. John 5:17).
3.2.2.4 The uniqueness of the seventh day (2:3)
We have already examined one way in which the seventh day was differentiated from the other six days of the creation week: it is the day that God ceased his creative activity. There are, however, two other ways in which God marks this day as unique: (a) he blesses it (ךְ ֶר ָבְי ַו) and (b) he sets it apart (שׁ ֵדּ ַקְי ַו). Taken together, the two verbs describe what followed after God ceased his creative activity. At the same time, they serve to describe more fully the situation as it stood after his creative activity was brought to an end (See JM, 2008:364). The wayyiqtol form ךְ ֶר ָבְי ַו suggests that the blessing which the seventh day receives is a consequence of God’s cessation of activity,12and the subordinate clause וֹתּ ְכא ַל ְמ־ל ָכּ ִמ ת ַב ָשׁ וֹב י ִכּ reinforces that idea, explicitly stating
that it is so.13
Verse 3a. וֹתֹא שׁ ֵדּ ַקְי ַו י ִעי ִב ְשּׁ ַה םֺוי־ת ֶא םי ִהלֹא ךְ ֶר ָבְי ַו “And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy”
There are two aspects associated with the idea of blessing in this context. The first aspect is a “statement of relationship” that is made by the one who blesses. The second is a description of the benefits conveyed with the blessing. Therefore, when God blesses, he does so with an attendant benefit that marks the special relationship between him and the thing that is blessed (Richards, 1992:754). When used in the Piel (as in this verse), ךרב can have “various shades of meaning” (Keller, 1997:270). However, it is used primarily in the Piel with the meaning “to bless”. In the context of the Old Testament, with God as the subject, to bless means “to endue with power for success, prosperity, fecundity, longevity, etc.” (Oswalt, 1980a:132) or to “endue
11.While it is outside of the scope of the present work to discuss more fully, God’s satisfaction with the result of his work is marked in the repeated refrain, בוֹט־י ִכּ םי ִהלֹ ֱא א ְר ַיּ ַו “and God saw that it was good” (Genesis 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31). For discussion, see Collins, 2006:69-70 and the PhD dissertation of Ramantswana (2010) on the subject.
12.See BHRG, 1997:166
13.See JM, 2008:599
someone with special power” (HALOT, 2000:160). The implication is that someone or something is blessed for the purpose of fulfilling a particular function. For example, after seeing at the conclusion of the fifth day that the sea creatures and the birds are “good”, God blesses them (1:22) for the purpose of being fruitful and multiplying. Similarly, God blesses the man and woman in 1:28. As with the blessing of the fifth day, this blessing is also for the purpose of being fruitful and multiplying. However, there is another purpose to this blessing as well: humanity is expected to subdue the earth and exercise dominion over the other living creatures (Waltke, 2001:62; see also sections 4.5 and 4.6 below on this point). In both instances, the blessing given is tied to the function that the one blessed is intended to perform, and both are a statement of relationship between God and his creatures (see Scharbert, 1975:303; Brown, 1997:758-759; Wehmeier, 1997:278). By blessing the seventh day, God marks the unique relationship that he has with it by allowing it to function in a way in which the other days did not function. The first six days are days of labour. The seventh day is differentiated as God’s unique rest day.
In the Piel, שׁדק can mean to “consecrate”, “set apart”, or “declare holy” (BDB, 1951:872; HALOT, 2000:1073). In fact, when God is the subject, DCH (2010, 7:192) goes so far as to say “make inviolable”.14 In other words, it is not a simple declaration with no practical implication
(Keil, 1866:42). The underlying idea is positional or relational (Girdlestone, 1897:175): a particular relationship is formed with the object of the verb. The thing consecrated has been moved into the sphere of the divine and, consequently, no longer belongs to the sphere of the ordinary or common (Naudé, 1997:885). In Exodus 13:2, for example, we find: “Consecrate [שׁדק, Piel imperative] to me all the firstborn. Whatever is the first to open the womb among the people of Israel, both of man and of beast, is mine.” The result of “consecration” is the formation of a unique relationship between the firstborn and God. The firstborn of Israel belong to him in a relationship that is unique and not shared by the rest of the people of Israel. By its use in Genesis 2:3, God marks the particular period of the seventh day as something that is unique in relation to himself and distinct from the days that have gone before. It is a day that belongs to him as an
14. A similar statement is made by Naudé (1997:877), suggesting that it is because the day belongs to God.
exclusive possession. The reason why God formed this unique relationship with this particular time period is then explained in the latter half of the verse (see v. 3b below).
The composite picture that is created by these two terms is of a day that belongs uniquely to God. While it is true that all days “belong” to him, this particular day is relationally set aside for his exclusive use. As such, it is a day that has been empowered by him to function as the space in which his rest occurs.
Verse 3b. תוֹשׂ ֲע ַל םי ִהלֹ ֱא אר ָבּ־ר ֶשׁ ֲא וֹתּ ְכא ַל ְמ־ל ָכּ ִמ ת ַב ָשׁ וֹב י ִכּ “because on it he rested from all his work that God created by doing”
The final clause (with its embedded relative clause) describes why God chose to bless the seventh day and make it uniquely his own. The reason is tied directly to his satisfaction with the completeness of creation and the cessation of his creative activity: “because on it he ceased from all his work which he made in creation” (2:3b). The Hebrew text is awkward here. It literally reads, “which God created to do”, and the final infinitive construct תוֹשׂ ֲע ַל has been interpreted with various nuances. The NET, for example, treats it as a modifier forming a hendiadys with ארב, and translates it as “all the work that he had been doing in creation.” Hamilton (1990:141) suggests that it is “almost pleonastic”, but then, appealing to GKC,15 translates it as “creatively
made”. Wenham (1987:3) references GKC at the same point, yet translates it with “which God had created by making it”. In any case, the outcome is the same: the seventh day is marked by God’s cessation from active creative work.
3.2.3 Conclusions Concerning God’s Rest
There are a number of conclusions concerning God’s rest that we can take away from this analysis of the seventh day in the first creation account. First, both the creation of the creatures and the environment in which they carry out their existence had been completed by the close of
15.GKC, 1909:§114o. Gesenius notes that the infinitive is often used in a “much looser connexion to state motives, attendant circumstances, or otherwise to define more exactly” what is being described by the verb. He further notes that the English translation often requires the term “that” or a gerund (as translated here). Similarly, JM (2008:408) suggests that this infinitive functions more to give added detail or explain the preceding action. Thus it should be translated, “He ceased all his work which God had created by doing.”
the sixth day. Second, God created everything that he intended to create. Once his creational intention was fulfilled he ceased creating. We can understand this cessation of work as “rest”, as long as it is not abstracted from his work which was previously underway. Furthermore, God’s rest is not rest from all work but rest from the particular work of creation. Third, because God rested on the seventh day he has set it apart as something that belongs uniquely to himself and empowered it to function as the day on which his rest occurs.
3.3 Divine Rest in the ANE and Israel
One of the most striking aspects of the first creation narrative is that the concluding refrain of the first six days is absent from the description of the seventh day. The accounts of God’s creative activity on days one through six are concluded with, “And there was evening and there was morning, the nth day” (Genesis 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31). Its absence on the seventh day suggests that the seventh day never ended. Creation was completed, but God’s rest continues unabated (Waltke, 2001:68; Walton, 2001:152-153; Collins, 2006:125, 129). This notion is not unique to Israel. Similar ideas are found throughout the literature of the ANE in which the deity’s rest often follows creational activity.
3.3.1 The First Creation Account and its Placement in the Pentateuch
Westermann (1974:2-6) argues that the events of Genesis 1-11 cannot be understood without reference to their placement within the whole of the Pentateuch. He contends that, within the structure of the Pentateuch, the exodus event (including the crossing of the Red Sea and the subsequent events at Sinai) stands as the defining moment of the story. As one looks back at the events that led up to the exodus, both the intermediate and ancient history of Israel can be seen: the patriarchal history of Genesis 12-50 describes how Israel came to be a great people who found themselves in a foreign country. These chapters describe a story that is specific to Israel alone. Beyond that, however, Genesis 1-11 casts a net that is much wider. It describes a situation that is not owned by Israel alone — it belongs to all of humanity.
As such, the placement of Genesis 1-11 at the beginning of the larger narrative that includes the exodus does two things:
• It grounds Israel’s experience in the experience of humanity as a whole. “The texts no longer speak to Israel in the context of the action of the primeval period on the present — there is not cultic actualization — but through the medium of history . . . God’s action, which Israel has
